2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.actamat.2012.02.038
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Temperature dependence of the crystal–melt interfacial energy of metals

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
26
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(32 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
0
26
1
Order By: Relevance
“…It means that the crystal-melt interfacial free energy for CoSi and CoSi nuclei in the undercooled melt would play a decisive role in determining the primary nucleation phase. However, quantitative analysis for the primary phase selection with undercooling is challenging since the crystal-melt interfacial free energy of both phases is temperature-dependent and is a function of how the local structural similarity between the liquid and two phases changes with undercooling [27][28][29].…”
Section: Microstructural Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It means that the crystal-melt interfacial free energy for CoSi and CoSi nuclei in the undercooled melt would play a decisive role in determining the primary nucleation phase. However, quantitative analysis for the primary phase selection with undercooling is challenging since the crystal-melt interfacial free energy of both phases is temperature-dependent and is a function of how the local structural similarity between the liquid and two phases changes with undercooling [27][28][29].…”
Section: Microstructural Analysesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The mobility of molecules/atoms at the homogeneous solid-liquid (S-L) interfaces is a controlling factor in a number of technologically relevant fields, such as self-assembled monolayer growth and nucleation [1][2][3][4][5][6]. However, the mechanism of the liquid molecules/atoms moving on solid surfaces remains mysterious and a matter of debate.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, it is not straightforward to discuss the change in solid–liquid interfacial energy out of the equilibrium condition. Specifically, the temperature dependence of the solid–liquid interfacial energy is still under discussion [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 ]. Several theoretical and computational studies have reported that the solid–liquid interface increased with increasing temperature (i.e., the positive temperature dependence) [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 ], whereas other literature has indicated that the temperature dependence of solid–liquid interfacial energy was not monotonic [ 39 , 40 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Specifically, the temperature dependence of the solid–liquid interfacial energy is still under discussion [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 ]. Several theoretical and computational studies have reported that the solid–liquid interface increased with increasing temperature (i.e., the positive temperature dependence) [ 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 ], whereas other literature has indicated that the temperature dependence of solid–liquid interfacial energy was not monotonic [ 39 , 40 ]. Different temperature dependencies for the interfacial energy of an unstable equilibrium (i.e., for nuclei) have been theoretically predicted [ 41 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%